I've said forever that Vic 1000 is equivalent to US 2000 on average
Using that formula, would Simon Gerada Vic 2238 be USATT 4476?
No not at all, because I was calculating where the top 15.88% of the population starts (15.88% of US players are over 2000).
Carbonmans theory of where sophisticated serves start could easily be a cultural thing, a population separated speaks another language so just because one doesn't on average use a certain type of serve doesn't mean they haven't made up for it in other areas. Then again I didn't even know a pendulum serve existed until 12 months ago, no one I had played against used one so I just didn't know. Just using a basic version of it now has improved my 3rd ball attack but I do get good variation on it where most people my level don't. Without that serve it would probably knock me back 50-100 points at the moment.
There is a real bottle neck around Vic 1050, When I was playing at that level a few months ago playing someone on 1020 was a straight 3 win with the points like 11-4 and then playing someone on 1060 could be a lost match in 4 and that difference was repeatable and consistant, but the difference from 1060 to 1400 wasn't much at all (less than the difference between 1060 and 1020). I've also noticed that the players who were around 1040 this year who haven't improved are all on 960 or less now and there are a lot of regular and consistant tournament players that have done that on the list over the last 12 months. I can only guess that the overall standard has gone up in that area above 1000 in the last year. So the whole thing is in flux and a certain rating comparison to the US system that works today might not in a years time. Maybe I'll see where that 15.88% thing is sometime later on.